Sediment assessment, management, and regulation in the 21st century

IF 3 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Richard J. Wenning, Sabine E. Apitz
{"title":"Sediment assessment, management, and regulation in the 21st century","authors":"Richard J. Wenning,&nbsp;Sabine E. Apitz","doi":"10.1002/ieam.4949","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Nearly 20 years ago, SETAC published the results of a Pellston Workshop on methods for assessing and setting sediment quality guidelines (SQGs) and associated tools (Wenning et al., <span>2004</span>). This was done to compile the state of science describing the harmful effects of chemical contaminants in sediments on freshwater and marine aquatic life. Since then, there have been significant advances in sediment ecotoxicology, monitoring methods, and risk assessment practices, as well as management strategies. The definition of “sediment quality” has also evolved and now encompasses more than just toxicity. It considers the chemical and physical characteristics of sediment that contribute to the health of aquatic ecosystems, including the quality of overlying waters and aquatic food chains. Advances have been made in the interpretation of the ecosystem services both provided and affected by sediments (Apitz, <span>2012</span>), as well as environmental baseline values used to identify the nature and extent of environmental changes outside the range of natural variability (Brown et al., <span>2022</span>).</p><p>While sediment sampling methods have changed little over the years, the methods for analyzing and interpreting various biological, chemical, and physical parameters used to evaluate sediment risk have advanced considerably (Bruce et al., <span>2021</span>). Broader and smarter sediment screening methods and advanced analytical chemistry and assessment methodologies capable of providing insights into the drivers of sediment toxicity offer some relief to traditional limitations of sediment quality investigations (Brennan et al., <span>2021</span>; de Baat et al., <span>2019</span>; Feiler et al., <span>2013</span>). Nanosensors and new analytical methods are available for assessing biological contamination, nanopollution, and new and/or emerging chemical substances in sediments and surface waters to support management activities that protect aquatic life and human health (Hairom et al., <span>2021</span>). Passive sampling, toxicity identification evaluation methods, and omics-based eco-surveillance tools have matured considerably and provide data that inform sediment assessment, regulation, and management (Heise et al., <span>2020</span>; Li et al., <span>2018</span>; Shah et al., <span>2019</span>). New methods involving measurements of e-DNA and e-RNA and other molecular biomonitoring tools, less intrusive passive samplers to measure contaminants in sediment porewater, and the determination of metrics of biotic and ecological integrity (e.g., taxonomic richness, composition, and tolerance and/or intolerance indices) provide indispensable information for managing aquatic ecosystems more effectively (Anaisce et al., <span>2023</span>; Giroux et al., <span>2022</span>).</p><p>At the same time, climate change and a relatively new suite of “emerging” contaminants, such as microplastics, nanoparticles, substances in personal care and pharmaceutical products, and perfluorochemicals, have gained increasing attention. Whether standard investigation methods and management approaches sufficiently address these new concerns requires careful consideration. Studies from monitoring networks such as the NORMAN network advocate effects-based measures covering specific bioassay batteries that can identify specific modes of action of chemical pollutants in the aquatic ecosystem to evaluate the real threats of contaminant mixtures and other stressors on aquatic life (Dulio et al., <span>2018</span>; Yusuf et al., <span>2021</span>). New or improved statistical methods are available to evaluate ecotoxicological data and large environmental data sets, and to identify habitat features that may be indicative of changes to the structure and function of the ecosystem or the viability of benthic invertebrate communities (Kienzler et al., <span>2019</span>; Popovic et al., <span>2024</span>).</p><p>It is increasingly important to understand how data are aggregated to inform risk decisions. Different types of investigations, from chemical to ecotoxicological and ecological analyses, are performed in sediment assessment. Advances in weight-of-evidence (WOE) analysis aggregate information from different investigation tools used in sediment assessment to reach conclusions about the probability and magnitude of hazards. New WOE frameworks aim to overcome the limitations of conventional interpretations of traditional sediment chemistry measurements, bioassays examining biological responses and biomarkers in sentinel species, and reliance on worst-case scenarios when interpreting separately chemical or ecotoxicological results (Bates et al., <span>2018</span>).</p><p>Sediment is not, however, only managed to address quality issues. The role of sediments in aquatic ecosystems and supporting various ecosystem services desired by society depends not only on quality but also on sediment quantity, location, and transport potential. In recent years, there has been an increasing focus on “circular” sediment management, emphasizing the importance of the beneficial reuse of dredged materials and nature-based solutions to restore, protect, and enhance aquatic environments. This new attention depends on a broader understanding of ecosystem-specific sediment quality. For example, sediments as a source of material for beach and shoreline protection and for creating and sustaining wetlands and coastal habitats must be of suitable quality, that is, the sediment must be free of potentially harmful concentrations of contaminants. Regional and national coastal and river basin strategies also require a deeper consideration of the role of baseline sediment quantity and quality conditions when devising sustainable and long-term management plans and decision-making. Commercial ports worldwide face challenges surrounding the inevitable trade-offs between preserving and protecting the environment and balancing economic development and social needs in catchments and coastal regions.</p><p>Global mandates for sustainable environmental practices are a certainty in the years ahead. Environmental assessments of aquatic ecosystems typically include evaluation and measurement of sediments, focused on land and water use, management on the landscape scale, and the consequences for biodiversity and the provision and resilience of ecosystem functions and services. These views and forecasts of our future clearly show that understanding and managing the dynamic interactions of sediment on a diverse range of endpoints at the watershed scale will be vital in the years ahead for effective sediment management.</p><p>The future of sediment management, including strategies for handling dredged materials and beneficial reuse of sediments, as well as for adaptation to global change, will need to adapt quickly by emphasizing nature and nature-based solutions that preserve sediment quality and protect aquatic ecosystems. Sediment management strategies that embrace the concept of co-valorization, which involves economic and ecological considerations for preventing contaminants from entering the environment and preserving natural resources such as sediments, are well underway in the European Union and elsewhere.</p><p>Today—20 years later—we find strong demand among resource management professionals in business and government for guidance on practical state-of-the-science information on assessing and managing contaminated sediments. Sediments play an important role in surface water quality and the food chain. Historically, insufficient attention has been given to how investigation and assessment approaches inform sediment management and protect aquatic resources and human use of the aquatic environment. Furthermore, uniform technical guidelines worldwide do not currently exist. This has spurred an ongoing debate among regulatory agencies and stakeholders about managing coastal, freshwater, and marine ecosystems, particularly in situations involving the transboundary management of fisheries, pollution, and water quality. Insights are needed on the underlying scientific principles and utility of different tools for diagnosing a sediment ecosystem's specific biological, chemical, and geophysical properties. Without these insights, stakeholders may be uncertain which approaches and tools work best.</p><p>While much of the science underpinning the derivation of SQGs remains unchanged from the 1990s, stakeholders should be reminded of the strengths, limitations, and methodological uncertainties associated with different methods for deriving chemical-specific or waterbody-specific sediment quality benchmarks and guideline values often used by regulatory agencies. Hence, we feel it is time for a new generation of scientists and professionals to review the chemical, physical, and biological attributes that influence contaminant risk and behavior in sediment. A fresh examination, as well, of tools and practices that inform decision-making for remediation, ecological restoration, and sustainable sediment management is called for. A reexamination will raise awareness and provide a technical primer for environmental managers engaged in coastal, river basin, and surface water management, contaminated sediment cleanup, and sediment quality issues.</p><p>Working with an international team of experts, we have begun collating these developments in a new book that discusses sediment assessment for 21st-century management. We aim to share this knowledge in 2025. For researchers, we hope this book inspires the development of new and better approaches and tools that integrate investigation, assessment, and remediation of contaminated sediments with future sediment management practices. For sediment managers and regulatory agencies, we hope to further inspire the long-term and sustainable management of aquatic ecosystems.</p><p><b>Richard J. Wenning</b>: Writing—original draft; writing—review and editing. <b>Sabine E. Apitz</b>: Writing—original draft; writing—review and editing.</p>","PeriodicalId":13557,"journal":{"name":"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ieam.4949","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ieam.4949","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Nearly 20 years ago, SETAC published the results of a Pellston Workshop on methods for assessing and setting sediment quality guidelines (SQGs) and associated tools (Wenning et al., 2004). This was done to compile the state of science describing the harmful effects of chemical contaminants in sediments on freshwater and marine aquatic life. Since then, there have been significant advances in sediment ecotoxicology, monitoring methods, and risk assessment practices, as well as management strategies. The definition of “sediment quality” has also evolved and now encompasses more than just toxicity. It considers the chemical and physical characteristics of sediment that contribute to the health of aquatic ecosystems, including the quality of overlying waters and aquatic food chains. Advances have been made in the interpretation of the ecosystem services both provided and affected by sediments (Apitz, 2012), as well as environmental baseline values used to identify the nature and extent of environmental changes outside the range of natural variability (Brown et al., 2022).

While sediment sampling methods have changed little over the years, the methods for analyzing and interpreting various biological, chemical, and physical parameters used to evaluate sediment risk have advanced considerably (Bruce et al., 2021). Broader and smarter sediment screening methods and advanced analytical chemistry and assessment methodologies capable of providing insights into the drivers of sediment toxicity offer some relief to traditional limitations of sediment quality investigations (Brennan et al., 2021; de Baat et al., 2019; Feiler et al., 2013). Nanosensors and new analytical methods are available for assessing biological contamination, nanopollution, and new and/or emerging chemical substances in sediments and surface waters to support management activities that protect aquatic life and human health (Hairom et al., 2021). Passive sampling, toxicity identification evaluation methods, and omics-based eco-surveillance tools have matured considerably and provide data that inform sediment assessment, regulation, and management (Heise et al., 2020; Li et al., 2018; Shah et al., 2019). New methods involving measurements of e-DNA and e-RNA and other molecular biomonitoring tools, less intrusive passive samplers to measure contaminants in sediment porewater, and the determination of metrics of biotic and ecological integrity (e.g., taxonomic richness, composition, and tolerance and/or intolerance indices) provide indispensable information for managing aquatic ecosystems more effectively (Anaisce et al., 2023; Giroux et al., 2022).

At the same time, climate change and a relatively new suite of “emerging” contaminants, such as microplastics, nanoparticles, substances in personal care and pharmaceutical products, and perfluorochemicals, have gained increasing attention. Whether standard investigation methods and management approaches sufficiently address these new concerns requires careful consideration. Studies from monitoring networks such as the NORMAN network advocate effects-based measures covering specific bioassay batteries that can identify specific modes of action of chemical pollutants in the aquatic ecosystem to evaluate the real threats of contaminant mixtures and other stressors on aquatic life (Dulio et al., 2018; Yusuf et al., 2021). New or improved statistical methods are available to evaluate ecotoxicological data and large environmental data sets, and to identify habitat features that may be indicative of changes to the structure and function of the ecosystem or the viability of benthic invertebrate communities (Kienzler et al., 2019; Popovic et al., 2024).

It is increasingly important to understand how data are aggregated to inform risk decisions. Different types of investigations, from chemical to ecotoxicological and ecological analyses, are performed in sediment assessment. Advances in weight-of-evidence (WOE) analysis aggregate information from different investigation tools used in sediment assessment to reach conclusions about the probability and magnitude of hazards. New WOE frameworks aim to overcome the limitations of conventional interpretations of traditional sediment chemistry measurements, bioassays examining biological responses and biomarkers in sentinel species, and reliance on worst-case scenarios when interpreting separately chemical or ecotoxicological results (Bates et al., 2018).

Sediment is not, however, only managed to address quality issues. The role of sediments in aquatic ecosystems and supporting various ecosystem services desired by society depends not only on quality but also on sediment quantity, location, and transport potential. In recent years, there has been an increasing focus on “circular” sediment management, emphasizing the importance of the beneficial reuse of dredged materials and nature-based solutions to restore, protect, and enhance aquatic environments. This new attention depends on a broader understanding of ecosystem-specific sediment quality. For example, sediments as a source of material for beach and shoreline protection and for creating and sustaining wetlands and coastal habitats must be of suitable quality, that is, the sediment must be free of potentially harmful concentrations of contaminants. Regional and national coastal and river basin strategies also require a deeper consideration of the role of baseline sediment quantity and quality conditions when devising sustainable and long-term management plans and decision-making. Commercial ports worldwide face challenges surrounding the inevitable trade-offs between preserving and protecting the environment and balancing economic development and social needs in catchments and coastal regions.

Global mandates for sustainable environmental practices are a certainty in the years ahead. Environmental assessments of aquatic ecosystems typically include evaluation and measurement of sediments, focused on land and water use, management on the landscape scale, and the consequences for biodiversity and the provision and resilience of ecosystem functions and services. These views and forecasts of our future clearly show that understanding and managing the dynamic interactions of sediment on a diverse range of endpoints at the watershed scale will be vital in the years ahead for effective sediment management.

The future of sediment management, including strategies for handling dredged materials and beneficial reuse of sediments, as well as for adaptation to global change, will need to adapt quickly by emphasizing nature and nature-based solutions that preserve sediment quality and protect aquatic ecosystems. Sediment management strategies that embrace the concept of co-valorization, which involves economic and ecological considerations for preventing contaminants from entering the environment and preserving natural resources such as sediments, are well underway in the European Union and elsewhere.

Today—20 years later—we find strong demand among resource management professionals in business and government for guidance on practical state-of-the-science information on assessing and managing contaminated sediments. Sediments play an important role in surface water quality and the food chain. Historically, insufficient attention has been given to how investigation and assessment approaches inform sediment management and protect aquatic resources and human use of the aquatic environment. Furthermore, uniform technical guidelines worldwide do not currently exist. This has spurred an ongoing debate among regulatory agencies and stakeholders about managing coastal, freshwater, and marine ecosystems, particularly in situations involving the transboundary management of fisheries, pollution, and water quality. Insights are needed on the underlying scientific principles and utility of different tools for diagnosing a sediment ecosystem's specific biological, chemical, and geophysical properties. Without these insights, stakeholders may be uncertain which approaches and tools work best.

While much of the science underpinning the derivation of SQGs remains unchanged from the 1990s, stakeholders should be reminded of the strengths, limitations, and methodological uncertainties associated with different methods for deriving chemical-specific or waterbody-specific sediment quality benchmarks and guideline values often used by regulatory agencies. Hence, we feel it is time for a new generation of scientists and professionals to review the chemical, physical, and biological attributes that influence contaminant risk and behavior in sediment. A fresh examination, as well, of tools and practices that inform decision-making for remediation, ecological restoration, and sustainable sediment management is called for. A reexamination will raise awareness and provide a technical primer for environmental managers engaged in coastal, river basin, and surface water management, contaminated sediment cleanup, and sediment quality issues.

Working with an international team of experts, we have begun collating these developments in a new book that discusses sediment assessment for 21st-century management. We aim to share this knowledge in 2025. For researchers, we hope this book inspires the development of new and better approaches and tools that integrate investigation, assessment, and remediation of contaminated sediments with future sediment management practices. For sediment managers and regulatory agencies, we hope to further inspire the long-term and sustainable management of aquatic ecosystems.

Richard J. Wenning: Writing—original draft; writing—review and editing. Sabine E. Apitz: Writing—original draft; writing—review and editing.

21 世纪的沉积物评估、管理和法规。
这种新的关注取决于对生态系统特定沉积物质量的更广泛理解。例如,沉积物作为保护海滩和海岸线以及创造和维持湿地和沿海生境的材料来源,必须具有合适的质量,也就是说,沉积物必须不含潜在有害的污染物浓度。在制定可持续的长期管理计划和决策时,地区和国家沿海及河流流域战略也需要更深入地考虑基线沉积物数量和质量条件的作用。世界各地的商业港口都面临着不可避免的挑战,既要保持和保护环境,又要平衡流域和沿海地区的经济发展和社会需求。对水生生态系统的环境评估通常包括对沉积物的评估和测量,重点是土地和水的利用、景观尺度的管理,以及对生物多样性和生态系统功能与服务的提供和恢复的影响。这些观点和对未来的预测清楚地表明,了解和管理沉积物在流域尺度上对各种终点的动态相互作用,对于今后有效管理沉积物至关重要。未来的沉积物管理,包括疏浚物处理和沉积物有益再利用战略,以及适应全球变化的战略,都需要通过强调自然和基于自然的解决方案来保持沉积物质量和保护水生生态系统,从而迅速适应变化。在 20 年后的今天,我们发现企业和政府的资源管理专业人员对有关评估和管理受污染沉积物的实用科学信息指导有着强烈的需求。沉积物在地表水质和食物链中发挥着重要作用。一直以来,人们对调查和评估方法如何为沉积物管理、保护水生资源和人类对水生环境的利用提供信息关注不够。此外,目前全世界还没有统一的技术指南。这引发了监管机构和利益相关者对沿海、淡水和海洋生态系统管理的持续争论,特别是在涉及渔业、污染和水质的跨境管理的情况下。需要深入了解诊断沉积物生态系统的特定生物、化学和地球物理特性的基本科学原理和不同工具的效用。虽然推导 SQGs 所依据的大部分科学依据与 20 世纪 90 年代相比没有变化,但应提醒利益相关者注意与不同方法相关的优势、局限性和方法上的不确定性,这些方法用于推导监管机构经常使用的特定化学物质或特定水体沉积物质量基准和指导值。因此,我们认为现在是新一代科学家和专业人士重新审视影响沉积物中污染物风险和行为的化学、物理和生物属性的时候了。同时,我们也需要重新审视为修复、生态恢复和可持续沉积物管理决策提供信息的工具和实践。我们与国际专家团队合作,已开始将这些进展整理成一本新书,讨论 21 世纪管理中的沉积物评估问题。我们的目标是在 2025 年分享这些知识。对于研究人员来说,我们希望这本书能激励他们开发出更好的新方法和工具,将污染沉积物的调查、评估和修复与未来的沉积物管理实践结合起来。对于沉积物管理者和监管机构,我们希望能进一步激励他们对水生生态系统进行长期和可持续的管理:写作-原稿;写作-审阅和编辑。Sabine E. Apitz:写作-原稿;写作-审阅和编辑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCESTOXICOLOGY&nbs-TOXICOLOGY
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
156
期刊介绍: Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management (IEAM) publishes the science underpinning environmental decision making and problem solving. Papers submitted to IEAM must link science and technical innovations to vexing regional or global environmental issues in one or more of the following core areas: Science-informed regulation, policy, and decision making Health and ecological risk and impact assessment Restoration and management of damaged ecosystems Sustaining ecosystems Managing large-scale environmental change Papers published in these broad fields of study are connected by an array of interdisciplinary engineering, management, and scientific themes, which collectively reflect the interconnectedness of the scientific, social, and environmental challenges facing our modern global society: Methods for environmental quality assessment; forecasting across a number of ecosystem uses and challenges (systems-based, cost-benefit, ecosystem services, etc.); measuring or predicting ecosystem change and adaptation Approaches that connect policy and management tools; harmonize national and international environmental regulation; merge human well-being with ecological management; develop and sustain the function of ecosystems; conceptualize, model and apply concepts of spatial and regional sustainability Assessment and management frameworks that incorporate conservation, life cycle, restoration, and sustainability; considerations for climate-induced adaptation, change and consequences, and vulnerability Environmental management applications using risk-based approaches; considerations for protecting and fostering biodiversity, as well as enhancement or protection of ecosystem services and resiliency.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信